DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2019-166850, cited by applicant, in view of Barbat et al. et al. US 9868361..
The claim 1 of applicant has the following structure disclosed with applicant’s reference numerals highlighted in parentheses;
A vehicle side structure comprising: a rocker (20,120) extending in a front-and-rear direction of a vehicle; and an impact absorbing member 70 adjacent to the rocker, wherein the rocker includes a tubular inner space (22,122) formed by joining a rocker inner panel,(30,133) made of a steel sheet having a hat-shaped cross section that is open outward in a vehicle width direction, and a rocker outer panel (43,143) made of a steel sheet having a hat-shaped cross-section that is open inward in the vehicle width direction with the openings thereof facing each other, and the rocker includes an undersurface (44,146) forming a step shape that is lower on an outer side than on an inner side in the vehicle width direction in such a manner that a downward extending space (24,124) is formed in the inner space of the rocker, the impact absorbing member is placed adjacent to and inward in the vehicle width direction relative to the downward extending space, a load transfer member (60,160)is provided within the downward extending space, the load transfer member having an elongated shape extending along the rocker and forming a closed cross-sectional portion by being joined to either the rocker inner panel (33133) or the rocker outer panel, (43,143) and impact load (F) from the outside in the vehicle width direction is transferred to the impact absorbing member (70) through the load transfer member (60,160).
Prior to the filing of applicant, JP2019-166850 taught that:
A vehicle side structure comprising: a rocker 11 extending in a front-and-rear direction of a vehicle; and an impact absorbing member 22 adjacent to the rocker, wherein the rocker includes a tubular inner space formed by joining a rocker inner panel 31 having a hat-shaped cross section made of sheet steel, paragraph 26, that is open outward in a vehicle width direction, and a rocker outer panel 32 made of sheet steeel having a hat-shaped cross-section that is open inward in the vehicle width direction with the openings thereof facing each other, and the rocker includes an undersurface 35 forming a step shape that is lower on an outer side than on an inner side in the vehicle width direction in such a manner that a downward extending space, figure 5, is formed in the inner space of the rocker, the impact absorbing member 22 is placed adjacent to and inward in the vehicle width direction relative to the downward extending space, a load transfer member 18 is provided within the downward extending space, the load transfer member having an elongated shape extending along the rocker and forming a closed cross-sectional portion, rectangular, paragraph 31, by being joined to either the rocker inner panel or the rocker outer panel, (shown joined to both, figure 5) and impact load from the outside in the vehicle width direction is transferred to the impact absorbing member through the load transfer member.
In this regard, the member 22 is a cross member of the battery case, claim 3, however all structural material of a vehicle body is able to absorb impact energy if sufficient force is applied. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in JP2019-166850 sufficient impact force to the vehicle disclosed in order to absorb impact energy and thus protect the vehicle occupants.
It was known in this art prior to filing to provide an impact absorbing member 120 of Barbat et al. to surround the battery case and between the battery case and the side sill or rocker panel 106 as taught by Barbat et al., col. 2, lines 54-56 in order to absorb impact energy upon impact. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in JP2019-166850 the impact absorbing member of Barbat et al. with cellular structure to better protect the battery case from damage.
Claims 2-3, the transfer member 18 is joined to the lower end of the rocker or sill, figure 5.
Claim 5, the member 18 is joined to the outer panel, figure 5.
Claim 7, welding is a common joint feature in this art to prevent unwanted movement obvious to provide here for this reason..
Applicant may seasonally challenge, for the official record in this application, this and any other statement of judicial notice in timely manner in response to this office action. Please specify the exact statement to be challenged. Applicant is reminded, with respect to the specific challenge put forth, of the duty of disclosure under Rule 56 to disclose material which is pertinent to patentability including claim rejections challenged by applicant.
Claim(s) 4,6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2019-166850, in view of Barbat et al. as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Kawabe et al.US 10464406.
The load transfer member 18 of JP2019-166850 is closed with side surface facing the outer panel 32, upper or top wall extending toward the inner panel 31, and lower wall extending to the inner panel 31. JP2019-166850 or as modified lacks beads at the rocker outer panel, taught by Kawabe et al. at figure 2 in outer panel 12. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in JP2019-166850 as modified by Barbat et al. with outer rocker panel with beads in order to strengthen the panel from deformation thus increasing resistance to lesser impact forces.
Claim 6, JP2019-166850 lacks second beads in the width direction of the load transfer member 18, taught by Kawabe et al. at figure 4, numeral 45b,45b1.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in JP2019-166850 as modified with horizontal beads in the member 18 to adjust the amount of force required for deformation.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2019-166850 in view of Barbat et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nagwanshi et al. US 8322760.
Barbat et al. teach honeycomb structure lacking a teaching of synthetic material, taught prior to applicant’s filing by Nagwanshi et al. at Col. 7, lines 14-18. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in the combinations above synthetic honeycomb material as a known material in this art to absorb impact energy..
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 lacks antecedent to first beads for the recited second beads, found in claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS H PEDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-6667. The examiner can normally be reached 4:30-1pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5550. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Dennis H Pedder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
DENNIS H. PEDDER
Examiner
Art Unit 3612
DHP
11/13/2025